Thursday, October 07, 2010

Costa Mesa United Forum A Success

FORUM A BIG SUCCESSThanks to the good folks of Costa Mesa United for a very successful candidate forum Wednesday night. It was the first time in memory when city council candidates and school board candidates mixed it up on the same stage. Left to right in the above photo are Chris McEvoy, Susan Lester, Chad Petschl, Wendy Leece, Jim Righeimer, Michael Collier, Judy Franco, Katrina Foley and Loretta Zimmerman.

BOWLEY AND CREW DID WELLCosta Mesa United Board President Gordon Bowley performed as moderator, assisted by Colin McCarthy, who posed the first barrage of questions to the candidates. The three panelists who later asked their own set of questions were Daily Pilot Editor John Canalis, Daily Pilot Sports Editor Steve Virgen and Newport Independent Publisher Tom Johnson.GOOD TURNOUTI didn't count heads, but I think the peak number of attendees was around 200 interested souls, including more than fifty young people of high school age. Estancia High School cheerleaders passed out question cards and pencils. Unfortunately, time constraints prohibited any of the audience questions to be used.

GENERALLY CORDIALThe forum was generally cordial, with candidates presenting their strengths instead of dwelling on opponents weaknesses. I say "generally" because there were exceptions.. more on that later.

REPLAY SCHEDULEI'm not going to try to give you a word-for-word analysis of the event. Costa MesaTV was present taping the event. This forum will be replayed beginning Saturday, October 9th and subsequently through the election on the following schedule:Tuesdays: 6:00 p.m.Wednesdays: 1:00 p.m.Thursdays: 8:00 p.m.Saturdays: 5:30 p.m.Sundays: 9:00 a.m.

PROGRAM LISTING OF ALL FORUMS TO FOLLOWI'll be posting a separate entry listing all the replay times for each of the previous three forums, including the links for the streaming video, soon.

SOME TENSE MOMENTSThe evening was not without it's tense moments, beginning with the scene outside in the parking lot where members of the CMPD hovered, awaiting the arrival of their signboard trailer, which apparently will be driven around town and was parked directly outside the Neighborhood Community Center last night. You can see the message in this photo. One of the comical parts of this situation was the vision of Planning Commissioner Jim Fitzpatrick - a Righeimeracolyte - skulking around near the group of officers, apparently trying to hear what they were saying. This photo shows him hiding behind a tree near the group. Ah, the games we play.
My general impressions of the event:

FOLEYKatrina Foley was the best prepared and provided the best answers to the questions. Everyone else was a distant second and beyond. She clearly had the best grasp of all the issues, including those specific to the school board races. She drew the most enthusiastic response from the crowd.

MCEVOYChris McEvoy seemed to lead the popular vote for the council race. His answers to many questions drew cheers from the crowd. And, he also made the statement that quieted the crowd, too. At the end, following Jim Righeimer's self-serving comment about being "attacked" by police unions for his position on salaries and benefits - McEvoy directed a statement specifically to Righeimer when he told him that the police and fire unions were not the only people who didn't want to see Righeimer elected to the City Council. He said that there are many more people who don't want him elected, too. You could have heard a pin drop
. LESTERSue Lester seemed intent on proving she was not simply a one-issue candidate. With each forum she seems to have a little better grasp of municipal issues.PETSCHLChad Petschl, a very nice, well-intentioned young man, is in way, way over his head. He has virtually no grasp of the issues in the city and particularly school board issues. He attempted to answer questions with broad, almost irrelevant replies that clearly demonstrated his lack of knowledge.

LEECEWendy Leece, once again, gave good answers - just as you would expect from a person with years of public service on the council and school board under her belt. Some of her answers were at odds with those of Righeimer that you could almost see her campaign stepping ever so slightly away from the GOP power-brokers who have moved into Costa Mesa. This is good news as far as I'm concerned. I don't agree with Wendy on many issues, but her willingness to hear opposing views and vote with her brain and conscience instead of falling in lock-step with the party line is a good sign.

RIGHEIMERJim Righeimer gave answers you'd expect from him, emphasizing budget issues. He did get off the stupidest statement of the night when he said that "you could double the police budget today and it wouldn't change crime in Costa Mesa one iota." He was looking directly at the representatives of the police and fire unions present at that time. You could hear jaws dropping throughout the room! Elsewhere during the forum he said the police union is spending $100,000 to defeat him. As each day passes, and he exhibits such strange behavior, it's becoming more and more clear just why he has NEVER been successful in any municipal election in the past. It's my hope that his record will remain intact on November 2nd.

FOLEY, AGAINOf the four school board candidates present, Katrina Foley gave the best performance, as mentioned above.

FRANCOJudy Franco's replies seemed more scripted - she did, in fact, read many of them. She should be commended for her three decades on the school board. Certainly, she has experience and has developed contacts over her term in both Sacramento and Washington, D.C. that are valuable.

ZIMMERMANHer opponent, Loretta Zimmerman, made clear, crisp replies - most of which were tilted toward the analytical side of issues and she frequently plugged her CERT training background, expressing the opinion that she hoped to get the youth involved in that program, too.

COLLIERMichael Collier, who is attempting to retain his seat on the board, emphasized what he called "Academic Rigor" - getting the students to study harder. WATCH THE TAPEAll in all, it was a good forum, where some interesting questions were vetted. Take the time to view the streaming video or the recorded taped replay on Channel 24 and 99 on ATT Uverse.

BEVER AND MOORLACH ATTACKIt's clear that tensions are rising between Righeimer and the public employee unions. This, of course, will be exacerbated by a commentary that appears today in the Daily Pilot co-authored by Councilman Eric Bever and Orange County Supervisor and Costa Mesa resident John Moorlach. You can read it HERE. They make no bones about it - they want to stall the negotiations on the employee contracts and budget resolution until AFTER the election, which means until after the new city council is seated in December. This is completely unacceptable and the fact that Bever has basically withdrawn from his civic responsibilities by boycotting the discussions to the point that he walked out of a recent meeting and failed to show up at the last council meeting only further demonstrates his unfitness for the job he was re-elected to do two years ago. If it wasn't such a costly project I suggest mounting a recall effort to remove him from office before he does even more damage to our city!

Tony, and those "dirty tactics" would be what, for example? You mean plastering the town with hand-made campaign signs? Suggesting, as he did last night, that he'd work on the council for free, including no benefits, and the cost saved could be applied to the ROCKS program? Telling Righeimer last night that the employee unions are not the ONLY ones who don't want to see Righeimer elected? Are those the "dirty tactics" you had in mind?

Say what, you mean people other than police and fire don't like Righeimer either? Righeimer says that isn't true, everyone loves him and he should be worshipped unconditionally. His past doesn't matter, just like the past of a child molester doesn't matter, right? Oh wait, it does... sorry I almost fel under Righeimer's "I better than everyone" spell for a second... now back to reality. It was good to see McEvoy do well, he would be good for Costa Mesa.

Watching the circus our city has turned into is exactly the reason we should all get behind a candidate like Chris McEvoy.

Why do you think Chris has anything to do with that trailer?

Or Sue Lester? or Chad Whats is name? Or Wendy Leece?

Is it because Chris is showing himself to be the type of candidate this city needs?

One not bent on political ambition and greed?

Righeimer brought his own baggage with him and he's has shown repeatedly how he intends to run things if elected. Most of the citizens I volunteer with in this community, want one thing , a better community. Righeimer and the current council majority have driven this city off a cliff. It's time we get someone like Chris to restore some sanity back.

Tony, Righeimer has enough campaign cash stuffed in his war chest. Go rent a trailer and print some signs.Good luck trying to find something 'Dirty" to write on them.

I think the best comment of the night was when Mr. Righeimer's wife tried to call the police association president outside to talk to him. He was just trying to get some coffee, and he politely declined. She asked again...he politely declined again, then she let him have it.

She said what the association was doing was wrong! She was clearly upset. The association president said, "but it's the truth". Her response? "The truth doesn't matter, he paid those things off"!

That's just too rich for words. Ma'am your husband decided to get into politics. Have you not paid attention to any political race in our country over the past couple of decades? He is putting himself out there for the public's scrutiny. If you can't stand the heat, please, stay out of the kitchen.

Disclaimer: The above comment from Observator is published as submitted. We here at A Bubbling Cauldron make no claim that the quotation included is accurate. However, since we've had independent confirmation that a conversation did take place between the two individuals, we felt it was appropriate to publish the submission - with this disclaimer.

It's unfortunate that Righeimer doesn't get that it's not about increasing the PD budget (that's never even been asked for). It's not about the officers’ willingness to discuss and accept certain concessions (we have tried).

His comment about doubling the police budget is just asinine. Is he now putting up a straw man defense, and trying to imply to the good people of Costa Mesa, that is what we have asked for? I can tell you it is not.

The problem is not that he asks questions. He can inquire, study, investigate, and explore any option he wants. The association will sit down and have negotiations with the city, and ultimately the hope is a deal that is equitable to all involved.

The problem is Righeimer’s approach. From the beginning, he took on pensions and pay, because it is a hot button topic nationwide. He chose to make that his platform, and he came out in a most arrogant and self serving way and fired the first shot. He made it clear that no matter what, he is not, and will not be a reasonable man. He and the rest of the schmucks in the Lincoln Club decided it was time to try to ride the wave of “anti-union” feelings these days, and they lumped the police association in with the Teamsters, SEIU and the UAW. If there is anyone who believes for a moment, that the police association is anything like that, they need to think again.

As a whole police officers are pretty conservative folks. Most (if not all I know) would identify as Republicans. So what Righeimer has done, is to attack the livelihood of the folks that should be making up his base and alienate us. He chose to take on the folks who run towards trouble, rather than run from it.

As always Geoff, you have captured the essence of yet another attempt to inform the citizens of Costa Mesa. I am going to watch the replays once more before making up my mind on which candidates I will support.

After reading today’s blog, I found it amusing how you started out with the usual polite, positive retrospect and ended wanting to have a recall. Nice.

I think you may need to empty out your left pocket a bit though; you seem to be leaning on that side.

OCLonghair, thanks... I think.:-) I understand why you might think I'm tilting left. I'm trying hard to keep an even keel, but the folks that represent the GOP in Orange County, including many of our current batch of Costa Mesa politicians, are inflexible, lock-step lemmings ready to leap off the cliff if Scott Baugh tells them to.

Things are so bad that our racist laurete, The Mouth From Mesa North, has actively touted Righeimer's candidacy. That endorsement alone should give every voter in this city pause before they select him.

So far, it's tough to find a well-crafted, thoroughly-reasoned discussion on any major issue from my side of the aisle here in Costa Mesa. Yes, Wendy Leece has shown an encouraging spark of independence recently - something I hope we see more of.

You claim to be a Republican, yet you praise to high heaven everything that the one lefty Democrat on the current city council says and does. You only have recently approve of Leece (a.k.a. grandma, barnacle and coattail rider in your past blog references to her), when she votes with Foley. The other Republicans on our dais, in every one of your blog pieces can never get it right in your personal opinion. Perhaps, you should re-examine your political affiliation in light of the preponderance of the evidence your blog provides to your readership.

We have written a long letter to The Daily Pilot detailing all the facts to the arrest of McEvoy. We'll see how "fair and balanced" the Pilot's reporting is if they should to decide to run the letter. If not then it is no problem as we're putting together a viral video, blog site and 5,000 fliers all detailing the facts about McEvoy's DUI arrest. He certainly thought this would never come out but now it has. So the choice is yours. A guy who had the courage to question the timing of a DUI checkpoint vs. a guy who was arrested for a DUI. Also we have the BAC level of McEvoy and it isn't pretty let us tell you. We're hoping McEvoy lies some more and attempts to say he was not drinking that night. Sorry we have the report. And we're going to be handing them out at the Eastside forum, putting them on cars and going door-to-door. We also have McEvoy's mug shot blown up to a huge size and are going to drive around Costa Mesa with it on the back of a trailer that says, "McEvoy arrested for a DUI." You can access the court case at Orange County Superior Courts. This isn't going away. The police and fire departments will not ire someone with a DUI on their record so why should we have him on our council.

opinionated, I don't "claim" to be anything - I've been a registered Republican all my adult life. That doesn't mean that I check my brain and conscience at the door when I enter the voting booth. In local municipal elections I vote for the person or people who I feel, based on their previous performance, public service, intellect, energy and attitude, will do the best job for my city. These positions are supposed to be non-partisan - only in the past decade did the OC GOP stick it's nose into our local politics and produced the likes of Chris Steel, Eric Bever and Allan Mansoor. Steel was a disaster from the very beginning - a man my age who ran 9 times unsuccessfully before the Westside Improvers got him elected. Bever has demonstrated consistently that he's unfit for his office - most recently by failing to do the job he was elected to do - he boycotted it. I think he owes us all an explanation - and a refund on monies he was paid to do the job. Mansoor can't put two words together without the blessing of Scott Baugh, Righeimer and the rest of the OC GOP hierarchy. He's a prototypical underachiever - a 15-year cop who didn't know the first thing about real law enforcement and a politician without any political instincts of his own. (cont.)

(cont.)Why do I support and praise Katrina Foley? Have you been paying attention? She's got more energy than any five other people I know. She not only talks the talk, but she walks the walk, too. I don't always agree with her views - and I tell her so when that's the case - but I never doubt her motives. I know she's doing what she feels is best for our community - not just the city, but the broader community in which we live. She's demonstrated that during more than a dozen years as a public servant on the City Council and the Planning Commission before that. Unlike most of the other council members, she doesn't let blind allegiance to political marching orders established by her party get in the way of working tirelessly for the benefit of all residents of this city. Quite honestly, she's just plain smarter than the rest of them. Tell me honestly - who would you rather have on our side of the table negotiating a big contract for the city - the Fairgrounds Sale, for example - Katrina Foley, who does it for a living, or Eric Bever, who lacks the ability to build consensus and cuts and runs when things don't go his way? Easy choice for me.

I didn't mention Wendy Leece in all that above. Yes, I criticized her when she rode Allan Mansoor's coattails to victory in her first election. She really didn't run her own campaign - she didn't have to. I disagree with many things she's done since she was elected - and have criticized her for them. This time around she's on her own and has taken positions that have placed her standing among the OC GOP bosses in jeopardy because she felt those positions were best for the city. She's handled herself well during the campaign and has shown a willingness to step away from Righeimer, for example, when her personal position was different than his. I'll disagree with her in the future and I'll tell her so. I also tell her when I agree with her - not that she needs my opinion on anything. She's shown a willingness to try to build consensus and works hard at understanding the issues. No, she's probably not going to jump at Mansoor's throat on issues as Foley has done, but she's showing more independence and gumption now and we're better for it.

And, if it matters to you, I've always taken ownership of my views - no pen name here. For the past ten years, when I began to actually pay attention to local issues, every blog entry, letter to the editor or comment posted has carried my name. Unlike those of you who choose to hide behind a veil of anonymity using a fabricated name to vent your spleen so you won't offend your neighbors - or your mother, my opinions are clearly identifiable. Next question....

Geoff, please don't offend cops by calling Monsoor one, he was in reality nothing more than a jailer...(now known as CSA's)

Truth, you have the Daily Pilot confused with Fox News... sorry to disappoint you. The difference between McEvoy and your boy Jimmy Riggy is that McEvoy admits mistakes but Riggy makes excuses for them. This proves McEvoy's good character and Riggy's lack of character.

And... police officers and firemen can be hired with previous DUI's (a wet and reckless is not a DUI by the way) but it is difficult... they would need to show remorse and have learned from the experience. With the way things are going in Costa Mesa now, I would say the only people who will apply to be a cop here will be that type of candidate soon... Pretty soon even Riggy will be eligible- he is not right now but standards will need to be lowered and all.

So McEvoy's a convicted drunk driver? Will the Cauldron post that info or is it only okay to slander Righeimer and not tell the truth of McEvoy's criminal past. Didn't McEvoy call for an investigation into the DUI checkpoint incident? What a hypocrite. I also just heard the Daily Pilot is doing an investigation into the money trail for McEvoy's mail piece he distributed on Wednesday. He says he's not taking money but he allegedly has Sandy Genis pimping paid mail pieces for him. Things with Mr. McEvoy are going to get real interesting in the next week or two. Stay tuned!!

Well then. Jim's a cop, Jim supports McEvoy, McEvoy is a drunk driver-- cops support drunk drivers. I love the irony! Do your fellow officers support criminals who kill thousands of people every year with their vehicles? Jim, you are such a hypocrite. Support whatever criminal element you can just to preserve your golden retirement package. Our police are the greediest people around. They'll sell their values for anything just to get their buck. Disgusting.

A DUI doesn't preclude one for running for and becoming president or a senator.

I believe McEvoy's mistake is not the sort of character issue that would make me think twice about voting for him for city council.

Further, McEvoy hasn't threatened legal action against anyone who speaks of this. This whole issue isn’t about Jim’s mistakes in the 90’s. Its about the lack of character he has own in how he has dealt with this recently. Bully is the word that comes to mind over and over again during his spotty tenure.

The likelihood of a mono-cultural city council if Jim is elected, (with Wendy as the lone centrist???), appointing a likeminded planning commission, with the goal of turning CM into Irvana (all bow southward to the Holiest Alter of planned community development), would be disastrous for Costa Mesa.

When voting in this election, everyone should keep in mind that if Katrina Foley wins her bid for School Board, her open seat will be appointed by the remaining council. Do you really want Righeimer making that decision for you?

I'm with Bill T. Can't wait to see the PD's spin on this. A drunk driver on our City Council. Wow, have we sunk that low as a City? Funny, I didn't hear McEvoy bring it up when he was lambasting Righemer for his DUI checkpoint antics. It's okay to smear Righemer but not McEvoy?? McEvoy is a nobody who is going nowhere. Why do you guys waste so much time on him? Oh yeah, I am using my full and real name!!

If you want to see some real slimy undersides of whats encroaching onto our city stage read this one from Riggys greatest hits. Featuring Kurt Pringle, Scott Baugh, Ackerman, Dana Rohrbacher, et al. This is why even Righeimer isn't trusted even in his own party.

"Righeimer made the statements during a preliminary hearing into prosecutors' allegations that Baugh (R-Huntington Beach) falsified campaign finance reports,"

http://articles.latimes.com/1997/sep/24/news/mn-35647

"Jim Righeimer, Rohrabacher's campaign chairman, said the congressman has talked to Iran-Contra figure Oliver North about raising a substantial sum to help pay Carmony's legal bills, which could total $50,000 to $60,000."

Politics is all about dirty tactics... Riggy just seems a lot dirtier than the rest, and carries a lot of baggage, and will just be more of the same from what we've got from the council the last few years - look where that's got us.

Bruce KrochmanYou and Geoff seem to be of like mind – you both are very interested in who is commenting here rather than in the actual arguments, thoughts, and ideas offered.

It seems that you two are both anxious to make the discussion personal and not about the issues involved. Why else would you two be so interested in identifying the commenters on this blog? Use your name if you choose but don’t be critical of those that don’t.

It must be terrible to read comments from your “spineless people”, who as Geoff says, are afraid of what their mother or neighbors think of their comments.

In my case as a Viet Nam Vet, most of my neighbors and certainly my mother are very aware of my positions on our local issues. Anyway, why do you care who I am, unless it is only to use a person’s identity to attack them instead of focusing on their expressed views?

Also, your suggestion that anyone that sees the issues differently than you, are Martin Millardites, in an obvious attempt to cast all opinions contrary to yours, in some kind of a racial context.

Think about it – let’s keep this discussion on the issues that affect our upcoming election and dispense with this petty stuff!

If I cared about people using pen names here there would be very few comments posted, right? I don't want "Anonymous" used because I've seen threads where multiple commentors use it and you just couldn't follow the discussion. I understand that there are many reasons a person chooses not to take personal ownership for the views expressed on a blog comment thread. There must be a sense of freedom not taking responsibility for one's words - like shouting epithets from behind a wall. But that's OK... you're still welcome here - we take in all nameless strays. :-)

As far as that other guy you mentioned - the one from Mesa North - I've written many times about how I feel about his views. You'll note, by the way, that he seldom posts comments. I understand folks reluctance to post there - I sure wouldn't want my moniker associated with him in any way!

Joe Acuna, Bill T, Robo Bill, Imnew, TruthaboutMcEvoy, and others of your ilk, be advised that Chris McEvoy has NEVER been convicted of a DUI. By spreading that false information you are defaming him and are subject to legal recourse. Perhaps you should read the letter your pal, Righeimer, had his lawyer/brother-in-law send to me and others for some appropriate legal threat language. The record is absolutely clear on this issue. Of course, I know you all know that, if required by the legal system, it's possible to backtrack a blog comment, right? No? Too bad for you...

One of the problems with anonymity is taking comments seriously. For example, you claim to be a Costa Mesa Resident and Military Veteran. As you don’t identify yourself, that is impossible for anyone to know. You might just as easily be a twelve year old girl from Peoria Illinois.

But in the spirit of playing along…

You state:You and Geoff seem to be of like mind – you both are very interested in who is commenting here rather than in the actual arguments, thoughts, and ideas offered.

It seems that you two are both anxious to make the discussion personal and not about the issues involved. Why else would you two be so interested in identifying the commenters on this blog? Use your name if you choose but don’t be critical of those that don’t.

First, Geoff, as he has previously stated, does not care who is commenting. He just wants those commenting to pick a name so that the threads have some reasonable continuity as I understand it. On the other hand, I make a point of this because it is my one man crusade to get people to take responsibility for their words. I am a firm believer that anonymous internet comment capabilities provide far too much incentive for people to take liberties and avoid the courtesy of self editing that conversations between known participants would otherwise encourage.

By the way, I seem to recall your very argument, almost those EXACT words, from when I have brought this subject up in the past on the Daily Pilot site. I won’t tell you who made it…

You state:It must be terrible to read comments from your “spineless people”, who as Geoff says, are afraid of what their mother or neighbors think of their comments.

In my case as a Viet Nam Vet, most of my neighbors and certainly my mother are very aware of my positions on our local issues. Anyway, why do you care who I am, unless it is only to use a person’s identity to attack them instead of focusing on their expressed views?

It is in fact entertaining to me to read anonymous comments, especially from those who disagree with me. It confirms my suspicion that the people making those comments really don’t hold them dear. My theory is that they are merely looking to get a rise from someone else.

As for you being a Vet of the Viet Nam war or any other conflict, I may never know if you are or are not. I respect all of our Veterans and the service they have given our country. How is your claim of being a Vet germane to the discussion? Does being a Viet Nam Vet impose a specific set of political views? I know many Viet Nam Vets and Vets from WWII and more current wars and conflicts. They are a very diverse community of people with a very wide range of political views. I completely miss your purpose for the pen name and mentioning it in your post.

You state:Also, your suggestion that anyone that sees the issues differently than you, are Martin Millardites, in an obvious attempt to cast all opinions contrary to yours, in some kind of a racial context.

"Martin Millardites"... did you just make that up or is that a comon label? It is perfect and I will use it in the future. Thanks!

However, you obviously misread my statement. I said, “It seems to me that some of you are channeling Martin Millard. I guess I would also wear a mask if I were you.”

If I had said, “All of you who support Righeimer are channeling Martin Millard. I guess I would also wear a mask if I were you.” you would be correct that I was directing my statements at only those who oppose my point of view. As for a racial context, whatever do you mean? Martin has made it quite clear to me that he believes he is not a racist and is offended when people claim he is.

You state:Think about it – let’s keep this discussion on the issues that affect our upcoming election and dispense with this petty stuff!

Your entire post includes absolutely nothing about the election issues and is entirely a response to my “petty stuff.” As is this one, by the way.

Your acknowledgement of my service to our country is appreciated. Other Vets and active/reserved military may be interested in the fact that Home Depot will give them a 10% discount on all their purchases with proof of status. Home Depot is a patriotic corporation and deserves to be used by everyone needing their products and services.

You said, "If I cared about people using pen names here there would be very few comments posted, right? I don't want "Anonymous" used because I've seen threads where multiple commentors use it and you just couldn't follow the discussion. I understand that there are many reasons a person chooses not to take personal ownership for the views expressed on a blog comment thread. There must be a sense of freedom not taking responsibility for one's words - like shouting epithets from behind a wall. But that's OK... you're still welcome here - we take in all nameless strays."

I agree on your stand on restricting the use of “Anonymous” as it is hard to track the discussion if more than one person uses it to comment. I have noticed you will invariably let an “Anonymous” comment slip by if they support your point of view. :-)

Is your blog about issues and problems that affect our city or should we be focusing on who make their comments here? Your response about “epithets from behind the wall” suggests that you are thin skinned and unable to deal with the content of the comments. Let’s deal with the serious matters at hand and not worry so much about the identity of those that choose to contribute their thoughts and ideas on our local matters. I do believe in freedom and thank you for your providing others and me an opportunity to post our thoughts here on your blog.

You said, "As far as that other guy you mentioned - the one from Mesa North - I've written many times about how I feel about his views. You'll note, by the way, that he seldom posts comments. I understand folks reluctance to post there - I sure wouldn't want my moniker associated with him in any way!"

I only mentioned the guy that you are afraid to name because Bruce identified some of your commenters as “channeling” him i.e., those being associated with him and whatever negative that implies to some. See how that works – it focuses on personalities and ignores the specifics of the discussion.

CMVET,Thanks for your heads-up about the discount. All us vets will appreciate it. Regarding the use of "Anonymous", I have permitted the infrequent use of the name slip through, but not because it supported my view but because it made a significant contribution to the discussion. And, "invariably" is incorrect - you have no way of knowing.

Thin-skinned? Surely you jest! Have you read this stuff? If I was thin-skinned you'd be reading about half of what appears here! I do believe we're dealing with the serious issues at hand, but it's my blog, after all, and I'll decide whether "who" writes stuff is important or not here. Thanks for your opinion, though. I'm trying to provide a platform for debate here - seems to be working on these last few, wouldn't you say?

Enough about that other guy - just thinking about him and his putrid philosophy makes me want to puke.

If using a pen name was good enough for Benjamin Franklin, it's good enough for me.The Manny, Mo, and Beavis crowd usually out me anyhow.I like nom de plumes.......It adds a poetic dimension.The beauty and strength of the internet lies in it's breadth and anonymity.Those who usually demand to know who you are , usually are more about distraction and character assasination , than the merits of the debate.The real sick aspect that is occurring in this election on our local level is that supporters of Righeimer are actually taking names for some petty retributions to be meted out in the unforseen future.Welcome to the new face of Costa Mesa politics. Toe the party line or we will come after you. A very respected and active member from our community was reduced to tears the other night. That's why we need to defeat Righeimer. Time we put this community first again. Treat everyone with the respect they are due.

Links to this post:

About Me

REGISTRATION REQUIRED TO COMMENT
* To register, email to thepotstirer@earthlink.net :
* Pen name, (do not use "Anonymous") full name, valid email address and telephone number
* 1 pen name per person. Don't use another persons proper name.
* Comments without prior registration will be rejected - NO EXCEPTIONS
* Details at http://bit.ly/16kGDVh